You have asked me to express
an opinion about the state of mind of the protesters who have been arrested
on Salt Spring Island. While I do not know any of them personally, I can give
opinions about why, in general, people might commit such acts of civil disobedience.

In responding to your request
for an opinion on such short notice, I solicited comments from other members
of the International Community for Ecopsychology. I have attached contributions
from thoughtful, mature, and well-educated writers in New Zealand, England,
France, the United States, and Canada, describing their views of the importance
of saving trees and the legitimacy of sometimes breaking the law to achieve
this end.

Most acts of civil disobedience
are built on the concept of their being a "higher law" which cannot be ignored.
This belief was described by Henry David Thoreau in 1848:

"Can there not be a government
in which majorities do not virtually decide
right and wrong, but conscience? -- in which majorities decide only those
questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen
ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the
legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think we should be men
first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for
the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right
to assume is to do at any time what I think is right. It is truly said that
a
corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a
corporation WITH a conscience. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by
means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made agents
of injustice."

In the 20th Century,
these words have often inspired people to go to jail for their beliefs. In the
nationalist struggles in India and elsewhere, many future heads of Commonwealth
nations spent time in British prisons for their beliefs. The Civil Rights movement
in the United States achieved legal equality for all races through a systematic
campaign of lawbreaking. Despotic regimes have been overthrown in the Philippines
and brought to negotiations in South Africa through campaigns of peaceful civil
disobedience. More recently, environmental protesters went to prison in British
Columbia to help achieve an agreement to protect Clayoquot. History has mostly
been very kind to these lawbreakers, whose commitment has resulted in peaceful
solutions to conflict and to the redress of injustice.

In the current situation,
there are a number of possible motivations for the protesters. From a completely
utilitarian perspective, a motivation can be found in terms of the public good
-- the belief that private land is being used/abused in a way that negatively
affects the welfare of many other citizens and the community as a whole. The
wider community cannot, in this view, be properly compensated for these losses,
creating an injustice in the view of the protesters and their supporters. The
protesters may see themselves as democratically acting in the interests of this
larger community.

A different utilitarian
perspective arises when the welfare of future generations is taken into consideration.
In the face of massive scientific evidence that current human economic activity
will drastically reduce the quality of life for future generations, many people
are almost overwhelmed with a sense of panic and the need for urgent action.
This can easily lead to acts of personal commitment such as civil disobedience.
Joanna Macy has described this as a psychological defense against "environmental
despair."

The philosophy of Deep Ecology
formulated by Arne Naess and others holds that nature has intrinsic value and
needs protection just as human beings do. A believer in Deep Ecology sees him/herself
as part of the web of nature, equal in moral standing to other parts. For these
people, defending nature is seen as an act of self defense.

For many, the motivation
for civil disobedience is religious or spiritual. The early Christian martyrs
were punished for holding God's law higher than Roman law. Members of the Religious
Society of Friends (Quakers) have a long history of being conscientious objectors
and lawbreakers in response to their Peace Testimony of 1660 and later documents
related to slavery, women's rights, and other issues. The Quakers are currently
working on testimonies on "unity with nature", reflecting the change in values
taking place in contemporary society. Reverence for nature is central to Taoism,
Buddhism, Wiccan, Shamanism, and many other religious/spiritual traditions.
Environmental protection and reverence for nature have been parts of the Christian
heritage since at least St. Francis of Assisi in the 12th century.

The frustration of the protesters
in this and most other cases of civil disobedience reflects the absence of alternative
methods for resolving ethically-based disputes. With the failure of government
to recognize the legitimacy of their concerns and support all parties in this
dispute in reaching an agreement, the protesters have acted out of frustration;
the same frustration that motivated Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King.
History shows that negotiated settlement is the usual outcome of campaigns of
civil disobedience; it would seem better for everyone to do it now rather than
punishing people for demanding such negotiations.

In most cases of civil disobedience
the participants are peacefully and non-violently expressing their belief
that the law is not serving the cause of justice as they see it. In this case
they can find a higher law in religion, justice to future generations, community
values, or justice towards nature. From a psychological perspective, these are
all healthy motivations for action, including peaceful lawbreaking. These people
have been faced with a contradiction between their consciences and the letter
of the law and they have chosen to follow their consciences. Their conscientious
objections would seem to have sound foundations in history, philosophy, and
religious practice.